Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 15, 2026

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
What Alert Thresholds Should Be Used to Identify Critical Risk Results: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
Craig A Campbell1,2, Andrew Georgiou3, Johanna I Westbrook3
1The Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research (CHSSR), Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia; craig.campbell@health.nsw.gov.au.
Background:
Pathology laboratories are required to immediately report results which indicate a patient is at critical risk, but there is little consensus about what values are deemed critical. The aim of this review was to systematically review the literature on alert thresholds for common chemistry and hematology tests in adults and to provide an explicit and ranked source of this evidence.
Methods:
The literature search covered the period of 1995-2014. Evidence sources were critically appraised and ranked using the 1999 Stockholm hierarchy for analytical performance specifications in laboratory medicine modified for establishing decision limits.
Results:
The 30 most frequently reported laboratory tests with alert thresholds are presented with evidence rankings. Similar thresholds were reported in North America, Europe and Asia. Seventy percent of papers reported thresholds set by individual institutions, while 18% contained thresholds from surveys of laboratories or clinicians. Forty-six percent of the papers referred to 1 or both of the 2 American laboratory surveys from the early 1990s. "Starter sets" of alert thresholds were recommended by 6 professional bodies, 3 of which were collaborations between pathologists and clinicians. None of the 9 outcome studies identified dealt with confounding factors.
Conclusions:
Recommendations by professional bodies based on outdated surveys of the former state of the art or consensus are currently the best sources of evidence for laboratories to build their alert list. Well-designed outcome studies and greater collaboration between clinicians and the laboratory are needed to identify the most appropriate alert thresholds that signify actionable, critical or significant risk to patient well-being.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level
In hypothesis testing, a sample statistic is converted to a test statistic using z, t, or chi-square distribution. A critical region is an area under the curve in probability distributions demarcated by the critical value. When the test statistic falls in this region, it suggests that the null hypothesis must be rejected. As this region contains all those values of the...
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
